ILNews

Opinions Jan. 25, 2012

January 25, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Indiana Court of Appeals
Timothy Long v. State of Indiana
49A02-1105-CR-381
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated and being a habitual substance offender. Because the master commissioner presided at Long’s guilty plea hearing, and not at a criminal trial, she did not have the authority to enter a final judgment on Long’s sentence. Marion Superior Judge Linda Brown did not err by rejecting the master commissioner’s sentence and imposing her own sentence.

Natalie E. Murrell v. State of Indiana
67A01-1106-CR-251
Criminal. The trial court did not err by rejecting Murrell’s defense of duress. Murrell’s Class C felony conviction of attempting to provide cellular telephones to an inmate does not violate the proportionality clause of the Indiana Constitution. Remands with instructions for the trial court to correct its written sentencing order to impose concurrent sentences.

Kevin Walsh v. Chris Sweeney Construction, Inc. (NFP)
17A05-1107-PL-370
Civil plenary. Affirms order foreclosing Chris Sweeney Construction’s mechanic’s lien on Walsh’s home, awarding Sweeny Construction unjust enrichment damages for unpaid labor services and attorney fees and denying Walsh’s counterclaims. Remands for correction of scrivener’s error.

Anthony Earl Coakley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1107-CR-358
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Michael D. Perkinson, Jr. v. Kay Char Perkinson (NFP)
36A05-1106-DR-322
Domestic relation. Reverses denial of motion to correct error that challenged the trial court order denying Perkinson Jr.’s verified petition for modification of parenting time and support. Remands for further proceedings.

Jeremiah L. Hancock v. State of Indiana (NFP)
47A01-1104-CR-201
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to murder.

Jennifer Hutchens v. Gregory Sausaman (NFP)
43A04-1107-DR-395
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting custody of Hutchens’ daughter to Sausaman. Denies Sausaman’s request for appellate attorney fees.

Ryan N. Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1104-CR-378
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea to Class A felony child molesting.

Kenneth W. Gibbs v. Indiana Parole Board (NFP)
52A04-1106-MI-378
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of Gibbs’ petition for mandate requiring the Indiana Parole Board to determine his parole eligibility based on a vote of all five board members.

Ellettsville Holdings, LLC v. Garnett D. Kinser (NFP)
53A04-1103-PL-121
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment in favor of Kinser on Ellettsville Holdings’ complaint for damages based upon claims of breach of the parties’ purchase agreement and breach of warranty.

Jameson Curry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1104-CR-175
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molesting, but remands for sentence modification pursuant to Appellate Rule 7(B).

James Roby v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A05-1106-CR-302
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of cocaine.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of K.V., and Q.M.S. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1105-JT-535
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Anthony P. Wamue v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1106-CR-293
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Dwayne Burnett v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Opportunity Enterprises, Inc. (NFP)
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2012/january/01251207jsk.pdf
93A02-1106-EX-607
Agency appeal. Affirms finding that Burnett is disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT